Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Nov 14, 2016 - 02:37pm PT
|
I'm still waiting for a credible definition of "Trumpism." If we base it on the sayings of Trump, it can only mean contradiction. If we base it on sayings of those who voted for him, that, too can only mean contradiction.
In a way, it strikes me as the opposite of the difference between Marxists and Karl Marx on the effect of "underconsumption." Marx never said anything about it, so those who claim that Marx believed in underconsumption quote each other and ignore Marx. With Trump, on the other hand, we can probably find a Trump quote supporting or opposing every possible political position except free trade.
John
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
|
Nov 14, 2016 - 02:37pm PT
|
OK. Thanks for the Trump/daughter links. I wasn't aware of them. Having a daughter and stepdaughter in their early 50s, I can appreciate the indignation.
The uneducated white males who elected him are the vulnerable ones and they will not like what happens next (GK)
49% of white college-educated males voted for him as well. My take is that the public is fed up with both the Bush and Clinton dynasties. It's too bad the Democratic Party didn't have the gumption to move away from HC. They would have won the presidency.
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Nov 14, 2016 - 02:41pm PT
|
It's too bad the Democratic Party didn't have the gumption to move away from HC. They would have won the presidency.
John, I think that depends who they nominated. I think Bernie would have his own issues in a general election. If they nominated a centrist governor (meaning the equivalent of a Bill Clinton) without a lot of D.C. ties, on the other hand, they would probably have won not only the White House, but at least the Senate as well, if the Republicans nominated Trump.
John
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
|
Nov 14, 2016 - 03:02pm PT
|
Yes, John. Bernie's a good guy, but too far out on a political limb.
I agree. A moderate, well-spoken governor might well have won.
|
|
whoops
climber
paradise, ca
|
|
|
Nov 14, 2016 - 03:27pm PT
|
Lollie
I'm a solar contractor in California, I know your post is relevant. When you think about the health of the planet instead of the health of your church it becomes obvious to the most casual observer.
|
|
eeyonkee
Trad climber
Golden, CO
|
|
|
Nov 14, 2016 - 04:03pm PT
|
Great opening post to this thread. That was a good mix of reason and compassion.
I just wanna say, the scientist in me is struck by the down-the-middle separation of our citizens into Democrats and Republicans. It makes me think that there are some underlying (sociological) laws at work that are yet to be discovered. There are reasons, based on genetic/evolutionary arguments, that there approximately equal numbers of women and men in the world. I suspect that there might be similar forces at work in large populations of people showing conservative vs. liberal tendencies. Even though I have lambasted Trump supporters, my instincts tell me that they can't help themselves, just like me.
By the way, I just listened to Bernie on NPR. I didn't vote for him, but boy is he smart and compassionate!
|
|
NutAgain!
Trad climber
South Pasadena, CA
|
|
|
Nov 14, 2016 - 04:10pm PT
|
Nut Again, I agree generally on the need to prevent illegal discrimination in public accommodations, but whenever a business involves artistic or intellectual expression, I think the balance rests in the other direction. We don't require lawyers to take cases in which they have an objection of conscience. Why should we require an artist, say, to create something celebrating an event the artist believes to be wrong? That's the distinction people miss, particularly Avakian's actions in the Oregon cake decorating case.
John, I can meet you half way on this one. Fine, people making art or intellectual expressions shouldn't be curtailed in their expression of their ideology, to the extent that it does not undermine the safety and welfare of others. For example, I should not be able to make an intellectual appeal about the laziness and ignorance of some group of people who are a net drain on our economy and make the argument for their extermination or creation of hampster wheel farms to extract electricity from them. Bottom line, anything that encroaches on the health and safety of others should not be subject to freedom from discrimination. But the devil is in the details for what constitutes a threat to another group. Where to draw the line between "lighten up it's just a joke" versus a gradual erosion of respect for a class of people. Also,me saying "guns kill innocent people" is a threat to the "way of life" of people who love guns. So we need a way to disentangle "different ideas that make me uncomfortable" versus "my physical safety is at risk" or "emotional circumstances are undermining my sense of deserving to exist because of my characteristics that label me as part of a class but do not wholly define who I am as an individual." (e.g. ethnicity, physical characteristics, sex, sexual preference, etc.)
Maybe it is fair and appropriate to look at being stupid as a new protected class. Lots of smart people make fun of stupid people and undermine their sense of emotional well-being, and our modern world is more and more threatening to their existence because of lack of ability for them to earn sufficient money to survive in the modern economy. The increasing complexity of our society is robbing stupid people of their dignity based on work and their ability to contribute to society. One might say this election is a triumph for stupid disenfranchised people to reclaim their power in a world where they have diminishing opportunities. On the other hand, it is more common for stupid people (who are in the majority) to make fun of smart people. The smart people have to suck it up and deal with it until they can rise out of the small-minded and parochial roots until they can aggregate (typically in cities) with others who operate on similar wavelengths.
Tacking in a different direction, back toward the original topic of what rights and responsibilities that businesses should have....
I was just talking to someone a few days ago expressing the sentiment that it is a government encroachment to force churches to pay for abortions for their employees. I drew the line that it should be up to the individual to decide whether they want to partake of the service, and if the employees of the church follow the teachings of the church, they are free to exercise that perspective and not use the service. Similarly, they should be free to use their health insurance (which unfortunately in America is bundled with our employer in most cases) to get that service, even if the employer happens to be a purveyor of a different ideology. The idea here is that individual access to health and safety should not be compromised by a business or organization's ideology. One might say "then get a different job" but there are not always other economic opportunities, and it is a form of slavery and coercion to tie someone's economic wellbeing to a dogma that infringes more than necessary on individual freedoms. When there is a conflict in rights, our national ideology of personal rights should trump the rights of any religious or other organization.
The fundamental question to be ironed out here, to create a more peaceful society, is to precisely articulate what are the hierarchy of rights for individuals and communities with a shared interest and legal corporations, and create a precise and explicit ranking of priorities. This needs to tackle the various permutations of potential conflicts, and create a clear framework for prioritizing rights in such a way that the system as a whole has the fewest infringements while protecting as many perspectives as possible (as long as those perspectives are consistent with the principle of inclusion and coexistence in a society).
Here is one example of how Italy gets it better than the USA:
The Constitution recognizes free enterprise, on condition it does not damage the common good, health and safety, liberty and human dignity.
They clearly elevate the importance of human dignity. If we used that as a guidepost, how would it help us unravel our various societal conundrums? What would be a bigger loss of human dignity: forcing people to pay taxes to provide healthcare to everyone? Or people losing their homes, committing crimes, prostituting themselves to get money to pay for a medical procedure? People sitting around home collecting a welfare check and teaching subsequent generations to do the same, versus government employing people in various public works projects? Letting any idiot buy a gun, versus having a rigorous process to assess the impact to public safety of each person buying a gun? Forcing a woman to be pregnant for 9 months and give birth to an unwanted child, versus letting the woman chose when is the right time (if ever) for her to bring a child into this world. Is it a bigger trespass on human dignity for a narrow-minded person to be enraged by seeing two same-sex people holding hands, kissing, and celebrating with their friends in a wedding ceremony, or for two people who have dedicated their lives to each other to be deprived of the rise in workplace and societal status that comes from being married?
Enough! Back to work for me.
|
|
nah000
climber
no/w/here
|
|
|
Nov 14, 2016 - 04:43pm PT
|
here's an honest attempt at a definition of "trumpism" [based solely on what trump actually said during his campaign].
short definitions:
trumpism: 1. authoritarian nationalism [aka neo-fascism] as authored by donald j. trump
2. non-ideologically driven, exploratory base-voter grounded, sectarian populism
the longer explanations regarding the definitions above:
trumpism: 1. trump ran primarily on two things: "make america great again" and "only i have the answers regarding how to make america great again". accordingly, when pressed for details on most of his positions, there were no answers given.
2. when he wasn't running on authoritarianism, trump ran on a machine gun style throwing out of every idea in the book, recanting his last position until something stuck with his base voters. the only commonality [that i can see] to his proposals was that they were "anti-elite" and grounded in the position that whatever his base-voters agreed was true, was therefore true. these positions included the building of impossible walls, the enforcing of unprincipled bans on the movement of certain religious folks, and the murdering of the families of and the torturing of terrorists, to name but a few of the more, shall we say, surprising.
the point: to anybody who is not a fan of blindly following either an authoritarian or a non-ideological and base-voter driven sectarian populist, trump is [and should be] alarming as fUck [regardless of however he ends up actually choosing to act as president].
|
|
Mark Force
Trad climber
Ashland, Oregon
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 14, 2016 - 05:14pm PT
|
^^^Nicely done.
|
|
Norton
Social climber
|
|
|
Nov 14, 2016 - 05:47pm PT
|
quite predictable isn't it, that there are reports in the press of a very few people who
too advantage of the change to have some personal attention and make up stories?
should I post a list of the MANY examples of violent behavior that Trump supporters have already hurt people with?
this is often called a False Equivalence
of course, you can find that out all on your own with a one half second google search
|
|
Gary
Social climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2016 - 05:49am PT
|
I'm wondering what the ST Trump supporters think of the people he is considering for his cabinet.
|
|
Mark Force
Trad climber
Ashland, Oregon
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 15, 2016 - 05:57am PT
|
Word of the day: cronyism.
|
|
EdwardT
Trad climber
Retired
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2016 - 05:58am PT
|
should I post a list of the MANY examples of violent behavior that Trump supporters have already hurt people with?
Yes. Please do.
Here are some examples of anti-Trump violence and calls for violence.
You're right about the false equivalence. But you've got it backwards.
Two men were arrested in Meriden, Connecticut, on Saturday after beating up a Trump supporter. The Trump fan was on a traffic island, holding up both a pro-Trump sign and American flag, when suspects Wilson Eschevarria and Anthony Hobdy got out of their vehicle and proceeded to attack the victim.
In New York City on Friday, a Trump supporter wearing a “Make America Great Again” cap was assaulted while riding the subway. The victim was reportedly choked by an anti-Trump aggressor.
The anti-Trump violence has also spread to schools. Jade Armenio, a sophomore at Woodside High School in Woodside, California, who isn't even old enough to vote, was nevertheless attacked by a gang of fellow students for having supported Trump.
In addition to isolated incidents of violent attacks on individual Trump supporters, the anti-Trump protests popping up across the country have also seen incidents of violence.
The worst violence has been in Portland, where on Saturday one person was shot and roughly 70 people were arrested. Projectiles, including glass bottles and road flares, were thrown at police officers.
On Friday, harrowing video footage from the city showed a pregnant woman trapped in her car as protesters proceeded to attack it. Her only apparent crime was being white and in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Those progressives not brave — or perhaps stupid — enough to physically assault innocent Trump supporters or police officers, have taken to social media and issued calls for violence against Trump, Vice President-Elect Mike Pence, and their supporters.
A search for "kill Trump" or "assassinate Trump" returns countless tweets on Twitter, and while it would be nice to think that these are merely the ramblings of mentally unhinged, adolescent basement-dwellers, some of these threats are being issued by well-known, ostensibly upstanding citizens.
Matt Harrigan, CEO of PacketSled, is currently on leave for tweeting that he wished to shoot Trump with a sniper rifle. Meanwhile, director and screenwriter Paul Schrader, who co-wrote such Scorsese classics as "Taxi Driver" and "Raging Bull," issued a direct call for armed rebellion.
Even Joss Whedon — frequent Marvel collaborator, creator of "Buffy the Vampire Slayer," and uncrowned King of the Nerds — appeared to issue a call for revolution on social media. "This is simple: Trump cannot CANNOT be allowed a term in office. It's not about 2018. It's about RIGHT NOW," he tweeted on Monday.
In the last week, it has become clear that progressives only respect the democratic process and representative government as long as they deliver a progressive agenda. The pure vitriol spat by Democrats and their supporters in the face of Trump's victory is unlike anything seen since the pure vitriol spat by Democrats and their supporters in the face of Lincoln's electoral victory 156 years ago.
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2016 - 06:51am PT
|
So did you see the 60 Minutes piece (Donald Trump, post-election), Crankster?
|
|
Gary
Social climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2016 - 06:55am PT
|
I'm wondering what the ST Trump supporters think of the people he is considering for his cabinet.
|
|
patrick compton
Trad climber
van
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2016 - 06:56am PT
|
I'm wondering what the ST Trump supporters think of the people he is considering for his cabinet.
I'm glad Bannon will take care of the Jew problems
|
|
rbord
Boulder climber
atlanta
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2016 - 07:00am PT
|
West Virginia?
Here on Supertopo, the white adoptive father of a black daughter called our first black First Lady a man.
While choosing to raise his daughter in a town with 0% blacks.
Because maybe white people are just better role models for a black daughter? Or maybe the white women are just not quite as manly.
And then he prayed for Trump to win.
Now we have a white nationalist in the ear of the president, and the KKK is throwing a parade to celebrate.
While this white dad says that he trusts his black daughter with them, and his white friends say he's an alright guy.
This sh#t runs deeper than we think.
|
|
SusanA
Sport climber
Bay Area
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2016 - 07:31am PT
|
Geez Mark, do you think people really read the books you post? Shorten it up a bit, would you?
Anyway, what the libtards call "working together" is really sh#tcanning your own beliefs and caving to their agenda.
They are not interested in working "together" at all. The sooner these stupid Republicans realize this the better off we will be. It is the Republicans constantly caving and compromising that got us Trump in the first place.
What I am learning from this election is that some people who claim to Christians can be very nasty.
Hi Jody, you have told us that you have some knowledge of scripture, can you tell us what passages you took that sentiment from?
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!